NASA: Only 10 Years Till Irreversable Climatic Danger Point

Originally posted by ferretman2
Interesting that no one seems to have notices the graph provided by Nick......it's a planetary cycle.

I did and it is correct, and has been scientifically proven to be correct

Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming, Scientist Says

"The long-term increase in solar irradiance is heating both Earth and Mars," he said. "...

Global Warming on Mars. Artificial greenhouse gases that are bad news on Earth could provide the means to make Mars a more comfortable place for humans...

NASA

So WHICH Scientist do we believe? They are more at odds with their theories than members of ATS

So if Earth becomes to Hot to handle, and Mars gets warmer and more comfortable, can anyone guess why NASA is making a big push to get to Mars?

But don't worry... just get more beer, because you won't be invited to go anyway

Maybe IF the climate kills all the people on Earth there will finally be peace....

10 years eh? The trend in recent scientific data in Climate seems to be that the for every prediction they make, it turns to be mostly true, only sooner than expected.

Total destruction of the Earth? Nah. It'll balance itself out eventually.
Total fallacy: Global Warming? Nah. It holds some truth.

The answer seems to lie between the extremes. At worse, some parts of the Earth will remain livable. Life goes on. It adapts. If we (humans) are near the beginning of the end, we can adapt, or die.

With so many, a few should.... hopefully have traits that could survive in a changing enviroment.

Originally posted by Muaddib
Let me actually post the recent findings of some more "heretics" who put serious doubts on the claims that Climate Change on Earth is being caused by mankind.

Although correlations between Neptune's brightness and Earth's temperature anomaly-and between Neptune and two models of solar variability-are visually compelling, at this time they are not statistically significant due to the limited degrees of freedom of the various time series.

But, hey, lets just ignore one of the fundamentals of statistical hypothesis testing...



[edit on 31-5-2007 by melatonin]

Originally posted by hippichickThe western world will not act quickly enough to stop GW. This is because the western individual will have to make sacrifices and we all know how lazy and self-centred western people are. If you couple this with the inevitable capitalist disinformation and denial propaganda program, society inertia will ensure that our response to GW will be too late. GW pollution will only be reduced when it "hits the fan" and people cannot consume because the fossil fuel delivery systems fail. Too bloody late then!

It probably is too late to stop it, but in my opinion it will not be too late; for the benefit of the earth it will be just in time.

There are over 6 billion people on this earth. There are MANY people who cannot afford to properly take care of children, yet they continue to have them. Why? We can't just keep pumping out kids and consuming earth's resources at the rate we are.

A massive population reduction is needed very soon; maybe this is Mother Nature's way of doing that.

Originally posted by craig732
A massive population reduction is needed very soon; maybe this is Mother Nature's way of doing that.

So mother Nature has the same goal as the NWO

Originally posted by forestlady
The Avenger: So we should believe you just because you say so? Why don't you explain to us why GW is a hoax?

Global warming is real. The belief that humans and nothing else causes it is erroneous. At best, humans have been minor contributors. IN MY OPINION.

You want my justification for my thinking? Read my ATS A.G.W. thread which has over 400 posts. Believe whatever you choose, it makes me no difference. I have nothing to prove or any case to make. I am an independent scientist trying in my own small way to get people to learn the truth about climate change.

Me not open minded? My complaint here was that the news media doesn't show both sides of the issue, especially since us 33% A.G.W. skeptics are not a small minority. 66% is also not a consensus as the "warmies" would have you believe. Al Gore has ZERO scientific credentials, so almost anyone here is more qualified to render opinions on A.G.W. than he is. PERIOD.

How do you argue for open mindedness when you don't show me any? It would seem that I am the open minded one here. I want both sides of the issue examined and/or reported by the press. Again, I could care less who believes or doesn't believe what I have written. I will point out, however, that intelligent people examine ALL of the information available before deciding an issue for themselves. It's a somewhat rare human trait these days known as "thinking".

The key words are IN MY OPINION... which is all it is and if you were as open minded as you claim, you wouldn't be belittling people who disagree with you.

NOTICE

Please discuss the topic and not each other.
If you are unsure if this means you, please refer to this link
Mod Note: Debating Global Warming/ Derailing Threads

Originally posted by craig732
...................
A massive population reduction is needed very soon; maybe this is Mother Nature's way of doing that.

There is no need for any "massive population reduction"...

You sound like an environmental extremist....

Tell you what, why aren't you the first one to go?...

Originally posted by melatonin

But, hey, lets just ignore one of the fundamentals of statistical hypothesis testing...

Hey, let's ignore millions, or even thousands of years of geological data, and trust a computer program which gives guesstimates (proxies), which is flawed, and has been proven to be wrong...

[edit on 31-5-2007 by Muaddib]

Originally posted by Muaddib
Hey, let's ignore millions, or even thousands of years of geological data, and trust a computer program which gives guesstimates (proxies), which is flawed, and has been proven to be wrong...

A climate proxy is a measurable phenomena (e.g tree rings, ice cores etc) that is of little interest of itself but can be used to infer a variable of interest (e.g temperature, atmospheric CO2).

Thing is what can we do?

Honestly, truthfully. Taking the attitudes of the world Goverments and the ordinary people the majority of whome are trying to survive/ pay taxes whatever.

Its like myself, im 36, in 10 years ill be 46, in 30/40 years im likely to be dead. Yes i'd like to see a change but what can i do? I work 12 hour shifts to pay my way i see much of that go into taxes etc. you know what i mean. I like my life i dont see why i should compromise my life when im hurtling toward middle age and i'm happy with the way things are.

Much of all this is nature, i cant affect nature what can i do? Goverments dont give a crap, especially new economies like India and China. while we are trying to rake back those two alone will do more damage than the rest of us! What do we do? Invade? (No!) Blockade goods (99%) of western economies would be ruined because of the amount of goods we get off China.

you see what i mean. Nothing we can do by the time the squabbling stops it will be beyond too late. Besides its nature calling the shots and we are all along for the ride.

Lets do as humans always done. Learn to live with it. its what we are good at.

The problem is you won't live.

How hard is it is plant something. Dig a hole stick a plant/tree in there and water until it roots, not hard at all, even I can do it.

The way I see things is... if a species unlike us tells us we need to plant trees for our survival then I think we should plant trees don't you.

When I was told the human race was a stupid species I can see they were right. Why can't you simply listen and plant a tree or a few trees or several trees or one for every family member.

I was shown 2046 and there was nothing but dirt all you have to do is plant, plant, plant in mass and maybe your kids and grandkids will live to see that you tried. There is still time but the clock is ticking.

Everything is up to the peoples of Earth if you have love for your family members take action NOW

If you take Muaddib and Avenger at their word, then not only do we need not do anything, it is futile to even attempt because events will unfold as they will and there is nothing we can do to stop it.

If you ask me that is nihilistic.

The majority of climate scientists have endorsed the science behind global warming and have agreed that we are at the very least a contributing factor. The fine details are open to debate for sure but there is a surprising consensus concerning the overall thesis.

To listen to the nay sayers, their objections to human influenced global warming is not based on any political agenda, but some altruistic desire to educate us and to save us from making a huge mistake in regards to global warming.

ROTFLMAO... BULL HOOEY!!!

The tell tale proof that this is a load of manure is the fact that they repeatedly belittle and attack those who disagree with them or whine that they are the ones being abused and attacked... but who floods threads on this subject and does their best to drown out any descent?

These altruistic educators of ours, thats who.


[edit on 1-6-2007 by grover]

As I was told by the ones that know:

You try to hard through Science to prove things use logic and common sense....the answers are the simplest, the ones you always overlook.

Originally posted by observe50
1.)The problem is you won't live.

2.)How hard is it is plant something. Dig a hole stick a plant/tree in there and water until it roots, not hard at all, even I can do it.

1) Who will in 100 years...yes?

2.) Up a six story flat, hmmmm.

Originally posted by melatonin
A climate proxy is a measurable phenomena (e.g tree rings, ice cores etc) that is of little interest of itself but can be used to infer a variable of interest (e.g temperature, atmospheric CO2).

GCMs use proxies to make their guesses of future climate, and the GCMs also use "assumptions" to make those guesses. Hence it is flawed since we don't understand every factor that affects the climate. And do i have to mention that climatologists have to change the predictions of their GCMs pretty much all the time?... Sometimes their GCMs fall short, at other times their GCMs exagerate.

[edit on 1-6-2007 by Muaddib]

Originally posted by Muaddib
GCMs use proxies to make their guesses of future climate, and the GCMs also use "assumptions" to make those guesses. Hence it is flawed since we don't understand every factor that affects the climate.

GCMs are compared to proxy data to check for reliability. Thus they will run a GCM from some past point and choose the runs into the future that fit closely to proxy reconstructions and/or observable trends.

No-one says GCMs are perfect, which is why they have quite large error ranges associated with them, but they are consistently improving.

However, I do know someone who likes to pick a particular regional climate model, then use this data out of context in a misleading fashion, heh.

But a GCM is not a proxy, which is what you implied.

[edit on 1-6-2007 by melatonin]

ABE:

And do i have to mention that climatologists have to change the predictions of their GCMs pretty much all the time?... Sometimes their GCMs fall short, at other times their GCMs exagerate.

Which is why they have multiple runs to produce a range in which we expect future climate to be under different future scenarios.

As for changing the predicitions, I think it's more a case of the models improving and previous models being superceded by newer and better models. I'm sure you can see why this is a pretty poor criticism - you criticise the models for not being perfect, then criticise scientists for using enhanced models that can produce more realistic results.


[edit on 1-6-2007 by melatonin]

Originally posted by rustiswordz
Thing is what can we do?

Well if it is a change the Earth is going through by natural cycles(most likely scenario) there is nothing we can do unless you can find a ride off world to a better place. As Mars is also going through it, that comes to mind.. it could use a little warming up...

Maybe thats what happened before... mankind moved from Mars when it got too cold and all the water left... talk about a cycle

But what can you do? Start getting better isulation for your house... get solar generators... ( I hear China is marketing them cheap ) Lay in supplies because if the bees vanish, and the crimson tide increases food may be short...

You say you have 30-40 years left so it would be good to have some things ready

OH and LOTS of sunscreen.

Personally I am laying in a stock o gasoline enough to get me from Vegas to northern Canada where we have a little plot of land by a spring fed lake... deep in the forests...


Lake Meade is shrinking, its getting hotter here earlier... we hit 126F a couple days last year... so I will be ready... just in case...

Originally posted by Muaddib

Originally posted by craig732
...................
A massive population reduction is needed very soon; maybe this is Mother Nature's way of doing that.

There is no need for any "massive population reduction"...

You sound like an environmental extremist....

Tell you what, why aren't you the first one to go?...

Hey check this. i respond to a member who advocates "a massive population reduction is needed", and i ask if he wants to be the first one to go, and I get a warn from the staff....

So question, who is wrong, the member who advocates "massive population reduction", or the member who asks that member who proposes a "massive population reduction is needed" "why don't you go first"?... Watch for probably another warn or even a ban....